Allowed

M/s. Icici Bank Limited. v. Y. Sai Praveen Kumar

DRT12 Feb 2026OA/662/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The TribunalAllowed the Original Application filed by ICICI Bank for recovery of Rs. 25,00,466/- plus future interest and costs from the defaulting defendant, relying on documentary evidence marked including a hypothecated vehicle.

What did the court decide?

Defendant to pay Rs. 25,00,466/- with future interest 7.25% p.a. simple from date of application; bank entitled to proceed against hypothecated vehicle and defendant's properties.

M/s. Icici Bank Limited. versus Y. Sai Praveen Kumar — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

IN THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL-II AT HYDEMBAD DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026

¶2

PRESENT: SH. RAMESHWAR KOTHE, B.Com., L.LB. (Hons.), M.A. PRESIDING OFFICER

¶3

ORIGINAL APPLICATIoN No : 662 0F 2025

¶4

I4/s. ICICI Bank Limited., Gachbowli, Hyderabad. Rep. by its Authorized Signatory.

¶5

..,,.Applicant.

¶6

Versus

¶7

Y. Sai Praveen Kumar, S/o. y. Kondaiah 12/73A-Bf, Nandi Kotkuru, Opp: Basi Reddy Complex, Nandyala Road Kurnool Dist, Andhra pradesh - 519401.

¶8

, .. Defenda nt

¶9

Counsel for the Applicant

: Mr. Anil Vydya

Defendant

:Ex-parte

:: ORDER ::

The Applicant Bank filed the present OA for the recovery a total sum of Rs.25,00,466/- frcm the defendant with future interest @2%^p.m. compounded with monthly rests from 25.OZ.2O2S tnt the date of realization along with costs and in default for sale of hypothecated veh icle.

¶15

Summon served on sole defendant through paper publication and was set ex-parte on 26.L2.2025 as called absent and no representation.

¶16

The Applicant Bank examined K. Raja Yaswanth, Area Relationship l4anager, as AW-1 and marked 09 documents through him as Ex.A.1 toF^.A.O\6W'\S

¶17

oA.NO.652/2025

¶18

Heard the Ld.^{Counselfor the Applicant Bank Perused the} material Placed^{on record.}

¶19

The^point that^{arises for considerationls:-}

¶20

Whether the Applicant^{Bank is entitled} for the claim^{madein the OA against} the Defendant and^{OA hY7othecated} vehicle?

¶21

As stated supra,^{the Defendant remainedex-parteThe} Evidence AFfldavit^{coupledwith the recitalsin the documents} viz., Exs.A.1 to A.09^{marked on behalf of the Applicant Bank} clinches the claim^{of the ApplicantBank againstthe Defendant'} Hence, I hold^{that the Defendant is liableto pay the OA claimto} the Applicant^{Bank with future interestand costs'}

¶22

In the result, the^{present OriginalApplication No'662/2025is} allowed as under:^-

¶23

i) The Defendant is llable to^{pay to the} Applicant Bank a sum of^{Rs 25,00,466/-with} future interest @7.25o/o P.a.^{simplefrom the} date of application till^{the date of realization;}

¶24

ii) the OA claim is secured^{bY way of} hypothecatlon of vehicle described^{in the} schedule annexed to the OA^{and the} applicant bank is entitled to^{proceed against} the same to realise its debt;

¶25

iii) the applicant bank is also entitled to^proceed against the person and^propertles of defendants for realization of its dues; ,fu-^nl

¶26

/(,/^\r-,

¶27

oA.NO.662l202s

¶28

¶29

iv) the applicant bank is entifled for the costs.

¶30

B. The Applicant Bank is directed to file Cost Memo within 2 weeks from the date of receipt of this Order.

¶31

Issue Recovery Certificate accordingly.

¶32

Communicate a copy of this order to the parties concerned. (urctated to the steno, corrected, signed and pronounced by me in the open court on this the 12th Day of February, 2026).

¶33

PRESIDING OFFICER

M/s. Icici Bank Limited. v. Y. Sai Praveen Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s. Icici Bank Limited. v. Y. Sai Praveen Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ms Nanveeta Steels Pvt. Ltd. versus State Bank of India

Indian Bank versus Indeevar Industries

M/S. Yes Bank Ltd. versus Mr. Gandamalla Janakiram

M/s. Yes Bank Ltd. versus M/s. 101 Acres Real Estate and Infra Developers Private Limited

Icici Bank Limited versus Smt. Veeramachaneni Baby Lavanya

Kalingiri Saigirish Kumar versus Union Bank of India